Afghanistan

Lord Astor of Hever: To ask Her Majesty's Government how many foreign nationals are fighting as part of the insurgency in Afghanistan.

Baroness Taylor of Bolton: It is not possible to say how many foreign nationals are fighting as part of the insurgency in Afghanistan. The majority of Taliban fighters encountered are of Afghan or Pakistani origin.

Air Force: F-35 Programme

Lord Astor of Hever: To ask Her Majesty's Government following the statement by United States Air Force Chief of Staff General Norton Schwartz on 20 January, whether the Ministry of Defence has been notified of (a) the delay of the F-35 programme, and (b) any additional costs to the unit price of early aircraft as a result of a delay.

Baroness Taylor of Bolton: The UK has been briefed on the changes to the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) programme announced by the US and there is no immediate impact on either the UK's ongoing participation in JSF or our future plans to acquire the aircraft. We do not expect any changes to the costs of the three aircraft we have agreed to purchase for operational test. Any potential increase in the unit cost of future jet procurement will depend on a number of factors and we will continue to monitor this position closely along with our US colleagues.

Alcohol

Lord Jones of Cheltenham: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will alter the relative levels of taxation of beer and spirits.

Lord Myners: At Budget 2008, the Chancellor announced that alcohol duty rates on all products would increase by 2 per cent above indexation up to and including 2013. All taxes are kept under review.

Alcohol

Lord Jones of Cheltenham: To ask Her Majesty's Government what is their assessment of the role of well-run public houses as solutions to alcohol misuse.

Lord Davies of Oldham: Well run pubs are part of the solution to alcohol misuse through the provision of a regulated and civilised environment. A well managed pub is one that complies with licensing law and promotes the four statutory licensing objectives in the Licensing Act 2003. For example, offences under the Licensing Act 2003 include selling alcohol to a person under 18 years of age or to a person who is drunk, allowing disorderly conduct on the premises and breaching the conditions attached to a premises licences.
	The statutory licensing objectives include the prevention of crime and disorder, public safety, the prevention of public nuisance and the protection of children from harm. Responsible pubs work with the police and licensing authorities on best practice initiatives such as Best Bar None and local pub-watch schemes, which help to promote these objectives.

Alcohol

Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe: To ask Her Majesty's Government how many representations contesting new alcohol licences were made by members of the public and responsible authorities in each year between 1994 and 2010 in England; how many licences were refused as a result; how many were amended or revoked as a result; and how many were reviewed as a result.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The Department for Culture, Media and Sport does not hold specific information on why licences were refused, revoked or reviewed. The first comprehensive data collection exercise under the new licensing arrangements took place in 2007 and subsequently 2008 and 2009.
	Information on the numbers of licences reviewed, revoked, suspended or withdrawn for this period can be found on the department's website: http://www.culture. gov.uk/what_we_do/alcohol_and_entertainment/3192 .aspx.
	The Licensing Act 2003 came into force in November 2005. The terms "representations", "responsible authorities" and "reviews" derive from that statute and did not appear in alcohol licensing legislation prior to then. The old and new systems of regulation are fundamentally different.
	The table lists the number of premises licences and club premises certificates granted and those refused for the years 2006-07 to 2008-09 in England and Wales, as collected in the Alcohol, Entertainment and Late Night Refreshment Licensing Statistics Bulletin.
	
		
			 Type of licence 2006-07 Licences granted/refused 2007-08 Licences granted/refused 2008-09 Licences granted/refused 
			 Premises Licence 1420/220 11,700/310 10,600/280 
			 Club Premises Certificate 330/6 190/3 200/4 
		
	
	Prior to the 2003 Act coming into force in 2005, Liquor Licensing in England and Wales was a triennial publication that contained statistics on liquor licences issued under the Licensing Act 1964. During this period alcohol licensing statistics were compiled from returns submitted by magistrates' courts in England and Wales and had a reporting period of 1 July to 30 June. These data were collated by the Home Office up until 2001. From 2004 the Department for Culture, Media and Sport had responsibility for publishing this data.
	The table therefore lists the total number of licences applied for and total number of licences granted, between 1995 and 2004. As with data collected since 2005, DCMS does not hold specific information on why licences were refused.
	
		
			 Year to 30 June Licences applied for Licences granted Registered Clubs applied for Registered Clubs granted 
			 1995 6,124 5,552 684 639 
			 1998 7,034 6,118 707 539 
			 2001 7,363 6,482 1,126 1,045 
			 2004 7,958 7,717 704 557

Alcohol

Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe: To ask Her Majesty's Government how many new alcohol licences, broken down by type, were issued each year in England between 1994 and 2010.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The table lists the number of premises licences and club premises certificates granted for the years 2006-07 to 2008-09 in England and Wales, as collected in the Alcohol, Entertainment and Late Night Refreshment Licensing Statistics Bulletin. A licence can be for the provision of alcohol, entertainment and/or late night refreshment.
	We do not hold centrally data relating to new licences which include authorisation to sell or supply alcohol as one of the permissions.
	
		
			 Type of licence granted *2006/07 *2007/08 *2008/09 
			 Premises Licence 14,158 11,651 9,962 
			 Club Premises Certificate 328 186 203 
		
	
	*Figures for 2006/07 are based on 82 per cent returns from all Licensing Authorities, while figures for 2007/08 are based on 95 per cent of returns and 2008/09 on 98 per cent of returns.
	Prior to the 2003 Act coming into force, Liquor Licensing in Great Britain was a triennial publication that contained statistics on the number of applications for liquor licences under the 1964 Licensing Act.
	These statistics were compiled from returns submitted by clerks to justices in England and Wales and had a reporting period of 1 July to 30 June. These data were collated by the Home Office up until 2001 and by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport in 2004. Types of licences granted between 1995 and 2004 are listed in the table.
	
		
			 Year to 30 June Public houses etc. Residential and Restaurant Licensed Clubs Off-licensed premises Registered clubs 
			 1995 2,128 1,403 198 1,823 639 
			 1998 2,785 1,485 159 1,689 539 
			 2001 3,072 1,211 142 2,057 1,045 
			 2004 3,485 1,316 116 2,800 557

Alcohol

Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe: To ask Her Majesty's Government how, in the absence of compulsory data collection and submission by local authorities and accident and emergency departments on alcohol-related incidents, the impact of the Licensing Act 2003 on alcohol-related public health and alcohol-related crime and disorder is monitored and assessed.
	To ask Her Majesty's Government what statistical data are collected to monitor and assess the impact of the Licensing Act 2003 on public health and crime and disorder in England.

Lord Davies of Oldham: There are a number of established national statistical surveys that collect data on alcohol-related health harms and alcohol-related crime and disorder. The Government have always been clear that the licensing of premises where alcohol is sold cannot be considered in isolation from other factors such as national and local alcohol strategies and other interventions to reduce and prevent alcohol related crime and disorder.
	The Department for Culture, Media and Sport's (DCMS) evaluation of the impact of the Licensing Act in 2008 found there were signs that crimes involving serious violence may have reduced since the changes to the licensing regime, but there was also evidence of increases in the small proportion of violent crime occurring in the small hours.
	The evaluation also suggested that licensing reform has not been accompanied by an overall increase in alcohol consumption. The evaluation concluded that licensing regimes may be one factor in effecting change to a country's drinking culture, but do not appear to be the critical factor.
	This document is available on the DCMS website at http://www.culture.gov.uk/images/publications/Licensingevaluation.pdf.

Armed Forces: Compensation Scheme

Lord Astor of Hever: To ask Her Majesty's Government what was the cost to the Ministry of Defence of claims through the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme in each year since 2001.

Baroness Taylor of Bolton: The Armed Forces Compensation Scheme (AFCS) was introduced on 6 April 2005, and replaced two separate compensation arrangements under the Armed Forces Pension Scheme 1975 and the War Pensions Scheme.
	The amounts paid in each financial year against claims made under the AFCS are set out below:
	
		
			 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 
			 £1,274,000 £6,159,000 £13,067,000 £33,490,000 
		
	
	Under Resource Accounting the MoD is required to estimate provision for the future value of accepted claims, expected claims and guaranteed income payments under the AFCS. Details of these provisions can be found in the Armed Forces Pension Scheme Resource Accounts 2008-09, a copy of which is available in the Library of the House.
	Both the amounts already paid and future anticipated liabilities will be subject to amendment once the recently announced revisions to the AFCS have been implemented.

Armed Forces: Equipment

Lord Astor of Hever: To ask Her Majesty's Government what was the cost of defence equipment unaccounted for in each year since 2005.

Baroness Taylor of Bolton: The value of property lost or stolen, along with a range of other types of losses, is published in the summary of losses and special payments in the MoD's Annual Report and Accounts, copies of which are available in the Library of the House and online at: http://www.mod.uk/Defencelnternet/AboutDefence/CorporatePublications/AnnualReports/.

Armed Forces: Equipment

Lord Astor of Hever: To ask Her Majesty's Government what equipment-tracking measures the Ministry of Defence uses.

Baroness Taylor of Bolton: MoD Consignment Tracking (CT) enables visibility of equipment moving within the Joint Support Chain (JSC), from industry to the front line, and covers every physical activity that happens to a consignment during its journey. It provides a demonstrable link between the consignor's and consignee's inventories, starting with an issue or task issue order requiring movement through the JSC and ending with receipt onto account by the consignee. The MoD uses a range of measures to track equipment across the JSC, governed by the Defence Logistic Support Chain Manual, which provides the general and system specific processes and procedures for all stakeholders within the JSC to track consignments.
	The major In-Service CT information systems include: Royal Navy Invoicing and Delivery System;Visibility in Transit Asset Logging (VITAL);Total Asset Visibility, an active Radio Frequency Identification based system, which passes movement data to VITAL; anddata from Commercial carriers' systems (including Parcelforce, Palletways and DHL).
	These CT systems in turn interface with other information systems, in order to provide logistics decision support via systems such as Management of Materiel in Transit (MMiT).
	As a result of experience from Operations TELIC and HERRICK, six major business change projects are underway, supported by information systems, to make significant improvements in the JSC, which will enable operational commanders to sustain current operations and plan for future ones more effectively. Initiatives include:
	Joint Asset Management and Engineering Solutions: for engineering and asset management across Land equipment;Consignment Visibility: to provide the necessary data for MMiT, alongside that gathered from the MOD's commercial carriers;Air Movements Operations: to ensure efficient use of the Air Transport Fleet movement planning, asset scheduling and freight processing;Management of the Joint Deployed Inventory: offers operational logistic support for enhanced visibility and improved management of the deployed inventory; andElectronic Business Capability: to provide units with seamless visibility of Land items managed under Contractor Logistic Support arrangements from industry to the final tracking point.
	In tandem with these change projects, the Future Logistics Information Services (FLIS) Project aims to further rationalise the complex supply chain delivering Logistic Information Services across Defence.

Buying Solutions

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: To ask Her Majesty's Government how much was paid by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and its agencies to (a) PricewaterhouseCoopers, (b) KPMG, (c) Deloitte, (d) Ernst and Young, (e) Grant Thornton, (f) BDO Stoy Hayward, (g) Baker Tilly, (h) Smith and Williamson, (i) Tenon Group, (j) PKF, (k) McKinsey and Company, and (l) Accenture, in each of the past five years for which information is available; how they monitor contracts with those firms; and how the department reports (1) during, and (2) at the end of contracts, to Buying Solutions.

Lord Young of Norwood Green: Central records indicate that the following amounts have been paid since the creation of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, announced on 5 June 2009:
	
		
			 Pricewaterhouse Coopers £1,452,078 
			 KPMG £860,480 
			 Deloitte £1,455,475 
			 Ernst and Young £148,995 
			 Grant Thornton £1,793 
			 BDO Stoy Hayward £28,953 
			 Baker Tilly £Nil 
			 Smith and Williamson £Nil 
			 Tenon Group £Nil 
			 PKF £28,731 
			 McKinsey and Company £Nil 
			 Accenture £41,141 
		
	
	Contract monitoring regimes will be determined on a case-by-case basis. The department may choose to voluntarily provide feedback to Buying Solutions but is under no obligation to do so.
	I have asked the chief executives of the executive agencies to respond directly to the noble Lord.

Charities: Animal Welfare

Lord Elton: To ask Her Majesty's Government under what authority, controls and supervision and in what circumstances officers of a charity are empowered to (a) remove a pet from its owner's care, (b) keep it in their own care, (c) deny access to it to the owner, and (d) refuse to inform the owner of the place in which it is kept.

Lord Davies of Oldham: Charities have no power under the Animal Welfare Act 2006 to seize pet animals. The power of seizure can be exercised only by a police officer, an officer of a local authority or Animal Health. If the person who was responsible for the animal has concerns regarding its welfare following seizure then it is open to him to apply to the court for an order which could, among other things, grant him custody over the animal. Anyone aggrieved by the removal of an animal under the Animal Welfare Act may appeal to a magistrate's court for its return. The location of a seized animal may be withheld if it is considered that there is a danger that the animal may be stolen back.

Civil Litigation

Lord Astor of Hever: To ask Her Majesty's Government what was the cost to the Ministry of Defence of claims through civil litigation in each year since 2001.

Baroness Taylor of Bolton: The cost to the Ministry of Defence of compensation claims through civil litigation in each year since 2001 is as follows:
	
		
			 2001-02 £104,000,000* 
			 2002-03 £104,000,000* 
			 2003-04 £103,000,000* 
			 2004-05 £63,500,000 
			 2005-06 £67,700,000 
			 2006-07 £71,950,000 
			 2007-08 £85,710,000 
			 2008-09 £83,770,000 
		
	
	Figures are not recorded centrally for contractual claims or employment tribunals brought against the department. It is estimated, however, that these costs would be in the region of an additional £2.5 million per year.
	* These figures for total in year payments are not directly comparable with those shown in later years because of changes to the Ministry of Defence's accounting system and organisation.

Connecting Communities

Lord Greaves: To ask Her Majesty's Government how much has been allocated to each neighbourhood in the Connecting Communities programme; and what are the rules which determine the spending of such money.

Lord McKenzie of Luton: The following tables provide information on the grant funding allocated to each area to support their proposals for participating in the Connecting Communities programme. The funding for Connecting Community areas were paid to local authorities under Section 31 of the Local Government Act 2003 as an unringfenced grant.
	
		
			 Local Authority Connecting Community Area Funding (£) 
			 Amber Valley Borough Council Aldercar & Langley Mill 77,000 
			 Barking & Dagenham, London Borough of Alibon 60,000 
			  Becontree  
			  Eastbury  
			  Goresbrook  
			  Heath Wards  
			  Parsloes  
			  River  
			  Thames  
			  Valence  
			  Village  
			 Barnet, London Borough of Coppetts 50,000 
			  High Barnet  
			 Barnsley MBC Athersley & New Lodge 76,550 
			  Darton West  
			  Dearne  
			 Basildon District Council Laindon 33,800 
			 Bassetlaw District Council Harworth 78,000 
			 Bath & North East Somerset Council London Road, Snowhill 95,000 
			  Queens Road, Keynesham  
			 Bexley, London Borough of Colyers & North End 60,000 
			 Birmingham City Council Bartley Green, Weoley Castle 236,886 
			  Billesley  
			  Druids Heath, Brandwood Ward  
			  Kingstanding, Stockland Green and Erdington  
			  Masefield Estate  
			  Poolway  
			  Shard End  
			 Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council Little Harwood 50,000 
			 Blackpool South, Central and Grange Park 50,000 
			 Bolton Breightmet 50,000 
			 Borough of Poole Council Bourne Valley, Rossmore 34,000 
			 Bournemouth Boscombe 88,900 
			  West Howe  
			 Bradford East Shipley 46,000 
			  Keighley West, Bracken Bank  
			 Brighton & Hove City Council Moulescoomb & Woodingdean 75,000 
			  Whitehawk  
			 Bristol City Council Hillfields 55,000 
			  Southmead  
			  St George East & West, Brislington East  
			  Whitchurch  
			 Bromley, London Borough of Cray Valley & Mottingham 88,000 
			 Broxbourne Borough Council Bury Green Ward 49,000 
			 Bucks County Council Castlefield 55,000 
			 Burnley Padiham 60,000 
			 Calderdale Mixenden and Illingworth 70,800 
			  Todmorden  
			 Camden Gospel Oak, St Pancras & Somers Town, Haverstock, Regent's Park 80,000 
			 Cheltenham St. Pauls, Nesters Way, Oakley, The Moors (St Peters), Springbank, St Marks 26,997 
			 Cheshire West and Chester Council Ellesmere Port 50,000 
			 Copeland Borough Council, Cumbria Cleator Moor 88,200 
			 Coventry Canley 96,000 
			  Hillfields, St Michael's ward  
			  Willenhall  
			 Crawley Borough Council Bewbush & Iffield 34,315 
			 Croydon, London Borough of Fieldway 270,000 
			  New Addington  
			 Doncaster Carcroft and Skellow 60,000 
			  Lower Wheatley/Netherhall  
			 Dudley Castle and Priory ward 70,000 
			 Durham County Council Spennymoor 50,000 
			 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Goole 19,500 
			 Enfield, London Borough of Chase 37,500 
			  Enfield Highway  
			  Enfield Lock  
			  Ponders End  
			  Southbury and Turkey Street  
			 Fenland Clarkson ward, Wisbech 50,000 
			 Gateshead MBC Felling 50,000 
			 Gedling Borough Council Killisick 75,000 
			 Gloucester Barton & Tredworth, Westgate, Kingsholm, Matson & Robinswood, Kingsway (Quedgeley) 57,460 
			 Great Yarmouth Borough Council Nelson 48,500 
			 Greenwich, London Borough of Brook, Page and Corelli Estates 30,180 
			 Hartlepool Borough Council Dyke House, Stranton, Grange 42,200 
			 Hastings Borough Council Greater Hollington and Ore Valley 84,400 
			 Havering, London Borough of Mawneys and Elm Park 62,700 
			 Herefordshire County Council Newton Farm and Golden Post (Belmont Ward) 50,000 
			 Hillingdon, London Borough of Yeading 40,000 
			 Hounslow, London Borough of Bedfont, Feltham North and West, Hanworth and Hanworth Park 60,000 
			 Kensington and Chelsea, Royal Borough of North Kensington 70,000 
			 King's Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council North Lynn (Norfolk) 58,000 
			 Kirklees Golcar 71,450 
			  Heckmondwike  
			 Knowsley MBC Page Moss 50,000 
			 Lancaster Council Skerton 58,000 
			 Leeds City Council Belle Isle 60,000 
			  Gipton  
			 Leicester City Council Eyres Monsell 143,500 
			  New Parks Ward  
			 Lincoln City Council Abbey Ward 75,000 
			 Liverpool City Council Speke Estate 58,000 
			 Luton Borough of Luton 70,810 
			 Manchester Northenden 50,000 
			 Middlesbrough Thorntree 28,300 
			 Milton Keynes Council Tinkers Bridge (Woughton Ward) 43,000 
			 Newcastle-Upon-Tyne City Council Elswick 65,000 
			 North East Lincolnshire Council Fiveways 25,500 
			 North Lincolnshire Council Caistor Road Estate (Barton Ward) 28,525 
			  Winterton  
			 North Somerset District Council Western-Super-Mare Central Ward 47,000 
			 North West Leicestershire District Council Measham 45,000 
			 Northampton Borough Council Thorplands 35,000 
			 Nottingham City Council Aspley Ward 80,000 
			 Nuneaton and Bedworth in Warwickshire Abbey and Wembrook 35,000 
			  Camp Hill  
			 Oldham MBC Waterhead 60,000 
			 Oxford City Council Blackbird leys and Greater leys 79,169 
			 Pendle Brierfield & Reedley 60,000 
			 Peterborough Central Ward 93,000 
			  Westwood and Ravensthorpe  
			 Plymouth St Peter and Waterfront (Stonehouse Neighbourhood) 35,000 
			 Portsmouth Charles Dickens Ward (including areas of Nelson and St Thomas wards) 84,600 
			 Redbridge, London Borough of Hainault 71,437 
			 Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council Southbank & Grangetown 95,000 
			 Richmond upon Thames, London Borough of Castelnau 75,000 
			  Ham  
			  Hampton North (Nursery Lands)  
			  Heathfield  
			  Mortlake  
			 Rochdale MBC Kirkholt 50,000 
			 Rotherham MBC Dinnington 10,500 
			  East Maltby  
			 Rushmoor Borough Council Prospect Estate 57,000 
			 Salford Gainsborough Street Area, Higher Broughton 61,000 
			 Sandwell MBC Brickhouse and Springfield, 304,000 
			  Blackheath and Grace Mary  
			  Friar Park  
			  Ocker Hill  
			  Tibbington Estate, Princes End  
			 Sheffield City Council Broomhall 76,500 
			  Fir Vale  
			  Manor Castle  
			 South Holland District Council Holbeach 78,000 
			  Long Sutton  
			  Sutton Bridge  
			 South Tyneside MBC Central Jarrow 40,000 
			 Southampton City Council Bitterne (area around Sullivan Road, Sholing) 83,000 
			  Mill brook  
			  Weston  
			 Staffordshire County Council Etching Hill and Heath ward 53,000 
			 Stockport MBC Offerton 55,000 
			 Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council Newtown 52,000 
			  Stockton Town Centre  
			 Stoke-on-Trent City Council Bentilee 150,000 
			  Blurton  
			  Burslem & Shelton  
			 Sunderland City Council Castle, Redhill and Southwick 40,000 
			 Sutton, London Borough of Sutton Northern Wards: St Helier, Wandle Valley and The Wrythe 57,000 
			 Swale Sheerness 19,500 
			 Swindon Borough Council East Cluster Swindon (Park North, Park South, Walcot East neighbourhood renewal areas), Inner North Cluster (Pinehurst ward) 83,500 
			  Park Ward, Walcot East  
			 Tameside Hyde Newton 60,000 
			 Telford and Wrekin Arleston and College 55,000 
			 Thanet District Council Cliftonville West and Margate Central 22,000 
			 Thurrock Council Tilbury Riverside and St Chad's 83,000 
			 Trafford Partington 79,500 
			 Wakefield Eastmoor and College Grove 18,500 
			 Walsall MBC Birchills 30,000 
			 Wigan Hilton Park 68,500 
			 Wolverhampton MBC Bilston East 0 
			   Total 6,608,679

Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000

Lord Greaves: To ask Her Majesty's Government how many applications for (a) exclusion directions, and (b) restriction directions, have been made under section 24 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 in each year since the provision came into force; how many of those were approved; and how many were approved for an indefinite period.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The figures year by year for applications made under Section 24 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 are as follows:
	
		
			  2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 to date 
			 Total received 107 138 45 7 5 nil 2 
			 (exclusions) (74) (123) (32) (5) (3) nil 2 
			 (restrictions) (33) (15) (13) (2) (2) nil nil 
			 Total approved 14 19 15 5 3 nil nil 
			 (exclusions) (14) (7) (10) (3) (2) nil nil 
			 (restrictions) Nil (12) (5) (2) (1) nil nil 
			 Indefinite period 5 5 nil nil nil nil nil 
		
	
	The two cases in 2010 are currently in the process of being determined.

Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000

Lord Roberts of Llandudno: To ask Her Majesty's Government how many appeals have taken place under section 30 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000; and what was the outcome in each case.

Lord Davies of Oldham: Twenty-one appeals have been made under Section 30 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. Of these, six appeals were allowed, one was allowed in part and 14 were dismissed.

Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000

Lord Roberts of Llandudno: To ask Her Majesty's Government how many directions for exclusions and restrictions have been made under Section 31 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 in each year since the provision came into force.

Lord Davies of Oldham: As no regulations have been made under the power in Section 31 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, no directions have been given in accordance with this provision.

Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000

Lord Roberts of Llandudno: To ask Her Majesty's Government what regulations have been made under section 32 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The following regulations have been made under Section 32 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000:
	the Access to the Countryside (Maps in Draft Form) (England) Regulations 2001;the Access to the Countryside (Provisional and Conclusive Maps) (England) Regulations 2002;the Access to the Countryside (Provisional and Conclusive Maps) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2003;the Access to the Countryside (Correction of Provisional and Conclusive Maps) (England) Regulations 2003;the Access to the Countryside (Exclusions and Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2003;the Access to the Countryside (Means of Access, Appeals) (England) Regulations 2004;the Access to the Countryside (Correction of Provisional and Conclusive Maps) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2005; andthe Access to the Countryside (Exclusions and Restrictions) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2006.

Cyprus: Property

Lord Maginnis of Drumglass: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead on 3 February (WA 48-9), whether the English Court of Appeal has jurisdiction in the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus; and whether it can instruct the demolition of a house or the eviction of its occupants in Northern Cyprus.

Lord Brett: The English Court of Appeal has no jurisdiction in northern Cyprus. It follows that it cannot instruct the Turkish Cypriot "authorities" to demolish a house or evict its occupants. The Court of Appeal can uphold judgments in civil and commercial matters made in other EU member states, including the Republic of Cyprus. It is for the Courts to decide how such judgments should be enforced in individual cases, including what reasonable steps should be taken by individuals to comply with the terms of a judgment.

Cyprus: Property

Lord Maginnis of Drumglass: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead on 2 February (WA 19), how their support to improve the economic situation of Turkish Cypriots relates to the possible consequences of a settlement referred to in the question.

Lord Brett: The Government continue to believe that the only way to improve the long-term situation of Turkish Cypriots is through the reunification of Cyprus. This would require the approval of both communities in separate referenda. A solution will not be possible without the explicit agreement of both the Greek and Turkish Cypriots.
	The Government recognise the problems faced by Turkish Cypriots in relation to the division of the island and are committed to working within the legal constraints to ease them. As outlined in my noble friend's Answer on 2 February, improvement of the economic situation in northern Cyprus is one aspect that will help preparations for reunification. We are actively working with the Turkish Cypriots to bring them into line with EU norms, including economic standards, in anticipation of a settlement.

Democratic Republic of Congo

Lord Chidgey: To ask Her Majesty's Government what representations they have made to the Government of the Democratic Republic of Congo about the commission reviewing parts of the Congolese constitution, including presidential term limits.

Lord Brett: It would not be for the UK to influence the constitution of a sovereign state. However, we are engaging with the Government of DRC (GoDRC) on the importance of adhering to the constitutionally mandated term limits and holding elections within the constitutional timeframe. For local elections this means February 2011, for national elections this means September 2011. GoDRC have announced their intentions to hold elections to this timeframe, and we fully support this.

Elections: Registration

Lord Laird: To ask Her Majesty's Government what checks are made by electoral registration offices on whether Commonwealth citizens applying to register have the right to remain in the United Kingdom; whether electoral registration offices are required to check Commonwealth citizens already registered each time they change address; and what advice the UK Border Agency has provided on the matter.

Lord Bach: For the purposes of registering to vote, a "qualifying Commonwealth citizen" is an individual who either does not need leave to enter and remain in the United Kingdom, or who does need such leave and has it (Section 4(1) and (6) of the Representation of the People Act 1983 ("the 1983 Act")).
	Regulations made under the 1983 Act (the Representation of the People (England and Wales) Regulations 2001), provide that a person's application for registration must, among other things, state their nationality and include a declaration that the details given in the application are true. The Electoral Registration Officer has the power to require any person to provide information relating to the eligibility of that applicant, namely regarding their age, nationality, residence and whether or not they are disqualified (Regulation 23). Where an Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) has doubts about a person's nationality or immigration status, the ERO may require the person to provide evidence including a statutory declaration that he or she is a qualifying Commonwealth citizen (Regulation 24). Provision of false information to a registration officer for any purpose connected with the registration of electors is an offence.
	Where any elector changes address they must make an application for registration at their new address providing details of the address where they were previously registered. The procedure is the same as for other registration, and the Electoral Registration Officer may require the same information to be produced in relation to nationality.
	In addition, the details of all electors, whether resident in the UK or overseas (except service voters), are verified each year by way of the annual canvass. If the Electoral Registration Officer is not satisfied that a person is eligible to be registered at an address or does not otherwise fulfil conditions for registration, including nationality, then the Electoral Registration Officer may remove that elector from the register.
	The UK Border Agency has not issued specific advice on this issue. Electoral Commission guidance states that:
	"If the Electoral Registration Officer has any doubts about the eligibility of any applicant, they have the power to require any person to provide information relating to the eligibility of that applicant, namely regarding their age, nationality, residence and whether or not they are disqualified.
	Additionally, if the Electoral Registration Officer has doubts about the age or nationality of any applicant, they may also require that person to provide evidence demonstrating that they meet either or both of these requirements.
	The items which should be accepted by the Electoral Registration Officer as evidence of a person's age or nationality include:
	a birth certificate or a statutory declaration stating the applicant's date of birth; and
	a certificate of naturalisation a document showing they have become a Commonwealth citizen
	a statutory declaration that they are a qualifying Commonwealth citizen, a citizen of the Republic of Ireland or a European Union citizen."

Environment: Sites of Special Scientific Interest

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Lord Davies of Oldham on 1 December 2009 (WA 33-4), whether any boundary changes made to sites of special scientific interest (SSSIs) under section 28B, 28C or 28D of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 have resulted in a change to the classified condition of the SSSIs; if so, how many; and what changes were made.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The effect of the boundary amendments referred to in my Answer of 1 December (WA 33-4) was to add approximately 26,500 hectares (approximately 2.5 per cent of the SSSI area in England) of newly notified land under Sections 28B and 28C. This land would not previously have been subject to a condition assessment. The deletions under Section 28D are much smaller in scale and total only 17.67 hectares (0.002 per cent of the SSSI area). Having been denotified, these areas are no longer subject to condition assessments.

EU: Israel Association Agreement

Lord Hylton: To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of Israel's compliance with the human rights articles of the European Union-Israel Association Agreement.

Lord Brett: Article 2 of the Association agreement sets out that relations between the parties shall be based on respect for human rights and democratic principles. Based on this principle, the European Commission assesses the situation through formal and informal contacts with the Israeli authorities, including the subcommittee on political dialogue and co-operation and the informal working group on human rights and international organisations. The European Commission publishes an annual report that covers human rights among other things. The most recent, in April 2009, noted continuing concerns especially in relation to Israeli policies in the Occupied Territories.
	The EU also made clear its broader concerns about aspects of Israeli policy in the conclusions of the Foreign Affairs Council on 8 December 2009.

Fluoridation

Earl Baldwin of Bewdley: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Baroness Thornton on 18 January (WA 204-5), whether the 2007 analysis by the West Midlands Cancer Intelligence Unit (a) addressed the issue of fluoridated water and osteosarcoma at an individual level, (b) was age-specific, (c) had sufficient statistical power to detect possible harms among the population studied, (d) distinguished between young male and female subjects, and (e) was published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Baroness Thornton: The analysis was commissioned by the West Midlands Strategic Health Authority after publication of a PhD thesis by a former student of the Department of Oral Health Policy and Epidemiology, Harvard University School of Dental Medicine that claimed an association between fluoridated water and osteosarcoma in young males. The report of the analysis, Osteosarcoma Trends In the West Midlands, has not been published, but a copy has been placed in the Library. The West Midlands Cancer Intelligence Unit compared data held on its cancer registration database on the incidence of osteosarcoma in fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas by age and sex over the period 1989 to 2005. There were only 211 cases found in the West Midlands in the 17-year period, with no trend in the data identifiable. The Unit accepts that case control studies would offer the best means by which the causes of ostesarcoma could be assessed but, with such low incidence, it would take a long time for significant results to appear.

Fluoridation

Earl Baldwin of Bewdley: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Baroness Thornton on 18 January (WA 204-5), why the findings by Professor Chester Douglass on fluoride and osteosarcoma, which he said in a letter accepted for publication in Cancer Causes Journal on 12 January 2006 were "currently being prepared for publication", and in an e-mail to Professor K K Cheng at Birmingham University on 5 April 2006 were "aiming [for publication] for this coming summer", have not been published.
	To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Baroness Thornton on 18 January (WA 204-5), whether the description of the study by Professor Douglass as "longitudinal" takes account of his statement in a letter to Cancer Causes Journal in 2006 (17:481-482) that "Two sets of cases have been conducted each with their own control groups".
	To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Baroness Thornton on 18 January (WA 204-5), why South Central Strategic Health Authority in their 2008 public consultation document in citing Professor Douglass's purported findings on fluoride levels and osteosarcoma did not make clear that the reference cited (13) was not to a published study.

Baroness Thornton: The Strategic Health Authority was referring to the letter in the Cancer Causes Journal in which the joint authors Professor Douglass and Professor Joshipura state:
	"The Harvard School of Dental Medicine study of fluoride and osteosarcoma has been a 15-year collaboration among NIEHS1, NCI2, NDCR3 and Harvard. Two sets of cases have been collected each with their own control groups".
	The authors go on to state,
	"our preliminary findings from the second set of cases (1993-2000) do not appear to replicate the overall findings from the first part of the study. Our findings currently being prepared for publication, do not suggest an overall association between fluoride and osteosarcoma."
	We understand that the researchers are continuing to process and check their findings before submitting a report for publication.
	Notes:
	1 National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
	2 National Cancer Institute
	3 National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research

Green Public Procurement

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Lord Davies of Oldham on 4 November 2009 (WA 60-61), whether United Kingdom public authorities can access the make and model numbers of those products shown to yield best results in the European Union public procurement study.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The Collection of Statistical Information on green public procurement in the EU: report on methodologies that appears on the European Commission's website provides an overview of the level of green public procurement (GPP) in seven member states in the years 2006 and 2007, and sets out a methodology for measuring quantitative levels of GPP. The study includes a list of some of the labels or standards that meet broadly the same standards as EU green public procurement criteria in 10 product groups. Many of these labels are supported by websites that show the specific make for those products that meet their criteria. Both these websites, and other useful ones that are not linked to the labels listed in the study, are accessible by UK public authorities.

Health: Alternative Medicine

Baroness Tonge: To ask Her Majesty's Government when they will make a decision on the statutory regulation of acupuncture, herbal medicine and traditional Chinese medicine.

Baroness Thornton: The department has recently consulted on whether and, if so, how to regulate practitioners of acupuncture, herbal medicine and traditional Chinese medicine. The results of the consultation are currently being analysed and we expect a report to be submitted to Ministers in March 2010. Ministers will then make a decision on the way forward.

Health: Medicines

Lord Patel of Blackburn: To ask Her Majesty's Government how they ensure that medicine imported into the United Kingdom is genuine.

Baroness Thornton: In the United Kingdom, medicines for human use are regulated by the Medicines Act 1968 and supporting regulations and are subject to a licensing regime, to protect patient health.
	The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), which is responsible for the safety and licensing of medicines in the UK, regularly inspects authorised manufacturers, including importers, and distributors in the UK and conducts overseas inspections of manufacturers in third countries.
	The MHRA has developed and implemented a comprehensive anti-counterfeiting strategy, which focuses on reducing the availability of counterfeit medical products in the UK and is available at: www.mhra.gov. uk/Safetyinformation/Generalsafetyinformationand advice/Adviceandinformationforconsumers/Counterfeitmedicinesanddevices/index.htm
	In December 2008, the European Commission published proposals for changes to the EU legislation to strengthen it from the threat of counterfeit medicines entering the supply chain. Those proposals are still under discussion with member states and the European Parliament and are available at: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/pharmaceuticals/human-use/quality/fake-medicines/.

Hillsborough Castle Agreement

Lord Maginnis of Drumglass: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the Agreement at Hillsborough Castle of 5 February has identifiable ownership; to whom the foreword (paragraphs 1, 2 and 3) refers as "our" and "we"; and what legal standing the document has.

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: The agreement at Hillsborough Castle was between the First and deputy First Ministers of Northern Ireland leading their respective parties following all-party discussions at Hillsborough Castle. The agreement makes no claim about its legal standing. A copy has been placed in the Library of the House.
	It is an agreement, not a legal document.

Live Music

Lord Clement-Jones: To ask Her Majesty's Government how the terms "professional musician" and "professional live music" were defined by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport for its report Changes in live music 2005-2009, published on 28 January.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The terms "professional musician" and "professional live music" were intended to be synonymous with the definition of "employment in live music performance" used by the Creative and Cultural Skills Council.
	A minor clarification has been made to the article to reflect this.

Live Music

Lord Clement-Jones: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the Department for Culture, Media and Sport consulted the Musicians' Union and the Incorporated Society of Musicians on the numbers of professional musicians between 2005 and 2009 for its report Changes in live music 2005-2009, published on 28 January.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The department did not consult the Musicians' Union and the Incorporated Society of Musicians on the numbers of professional musicians between 2005 and 2009 for this report.
	However, the Musicians' Union website was searched for robust, publicly available employment statistics but none were found. The only data found meeting these criteria were hosted at the Creative and Cultural Skills website.

Live Music

Lord Clement-Jones: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the Department for Culture, Media and Sport estimated the proportion of the total annual adult attendance at ticketed live music events accounted for by the O2 Arena and Wembley Stadium between 2007 and 2009 for its report Changes in live music 2005-2009.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The Changes in live music 2005-2009 report neither estimated nor reported published data on total adult attendance at ticketed live music events. The attendance data published in the report were taken from the Department for Culture, Media and Sports' Taking Part survey.
	This showed a significant increase between 2005-06 (when the survey started) and 2008-09 in both the proportion and number of adults in England who attended at least one live music event in the previous year. This included both ticketed and non-ticketed events.

Live Music

Lord Clement-Jones: To ask Her Majesty's Government what proportion of interviewees in the 2007 British Market Research Board survey of live music were responsible for their venue's licence conversion in 2005 and had a good knowledge of the Licensing Act 2003.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The 2007 Survey of Live Music did not ask whether respondents were directly responsible for licence conversion as the survey was about staging live music and not the process of converting the licence.
	Regarding knowledge of the Licensing Act, 43 per cent of respondents said that they knew a lot; 31 per cent said that they knew a little.

Live Music

Lord Clement-Jones: To ask Her Majesty's Government what is the source of the Creative and Cultural Skills Council research that specifies the number of "live music musicians" in "professional live music" as reported on page 6 of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport report Changes in live music 2005-2009.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The source of the information on page 6 of the original Department for Culture, Media and Sport report Changes in live music 2005-2009is taken from the Creative & Cultural Skills (CCS) studies of the industry carried out in 2006 and 2008.
	The research is available on the CCS website: http://ccskills.org.uk/Industrystrategies/Industryresearch/tabid/600/Default.aspx.
	A new version of the report has now been released that includes the source of the data.

Marine Environment: British Indian Ocean Territory

Lord Wallace of Saltaire: To ask Her Majesty's Government what legal advice they have sought on the proposals for a Marine Protected Area in the British Indian Ocean Territory; and whether they will publish that advice.

Lord Brett: Legal advice on the general concept of a Marine Protected Area (MPA) in the British Indian Ocean Territory has been sought as normal within the FCO. Such advice is subject to legal privilege.
	As part of the FCO public consultation into whether to create an MPA, we have received a number of responses raising legal queries. These responses will be published in a summary of responses after the consultation has closed unless the author has specifically requested that the information be withheld.
	If it is decided in light of the consultation process that an MPA should be established, and there are favoured models for how it ought to be established, we will take legal advice in relation to those proposals. We are aware of our obligations under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Any MPA that we seek to establish will be fully compliant with our international obligations.

National Archives

Baroness Henig: To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to examine and report on the remit and management of Britain's archives and on the challenges facing the National Archives.

Lord Bach: Lord Bach: The Ministry of Justice, in collaboration with the department for Culture, Media and Sport, and Communities and Local Government, recently published Archives for the 21st Century, HM Government's strategy for archives. It sets out key recommendations to sustain and develop the archival health of the nation. In addition, The National Archives recently worked with the Business Archives Council and other professional bodies to produce a strategy for promoting the professional management of records and archives of the business community. The National Archives is currently working with public and private sector archives to support the implementation of both of these strategies. The National Archives also undertakes regular inspections of places of deposit for public records, and provides advice and guidance for the benefit of the wider archival sector.
	The National Archives is an agency of the Ministry of Justice, reporting to the Secretary of State for Justice. The National Archives senior management team works closely with Ministry of Justice Ministers, and agrees an annual business plan and targets for their activities. They are currently operating under a five-year vision for the organisation that addresses its key challenges and has been discussed and agreed with Ministry of Justice Ministers.

National Archives

Baroness Henig: To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they will take to ensure that the views of professional users of Britain's archives are reflected in the management of the National Archives and that senior managers there have professional archival qualifications.

Lord Bach: The National Archives has a wide range of users, including the public, information management professionals, academics and professional researchers and regularly invites feedback from them on its activities. This is done through a range of consultative mechanisms across the range of services it offers, including a monthly user forum and online user advisory panel, details of which can be found on the National Archives website. The National Archives has recently commissioned a review of the ways in which it engages with users.
	Additionally, the Advisory Council, a statutory independent group chaired by the Master of the Rolls, provides formal advice on public access to records and the care of archives and manuscripts to the Lord Chancellor, the Secretary of State for Justice and the Chief Executive of The National Archives.
	The National Archives has a broad remit covering all aspects of knowledge and information management, and the range of skills and qualifications of its senior management team reflects this. Senior managers within the organisation are qualified archivists, information managers, teachers, librarians, and human resources and finance professionals.

National Insurance

Baroness Warsi: To ask Her Majesty's Government how many illegal immigrants they estimate hold a national insurance number.
	To ask Her Majesty's Government what procedures are in place to ensure illegal immigrants are not able to obtain national insurance numbers.

Lord McKenzie of Luton: The Department for Work and Pensions has the responsibility for the allocation of national insurance numbers to adults.
	The department does not issue national insurance numbers to illegal immigrants.
	The department conducts thorough identity and immigration status checks on applications for national insurance numbers from foreign nationals. The department works closely with the UK Border Agency to identify illegal immigrants and an applicant who could not demonstrate that they were in this country legally would not be given a national insurance number.
	Anyone who has previously acquired a national insurance number but no longer has the right to live, work or study in the UK does not have access to the benefits system and the use of a national insurance number in isolation is not sufficient to obtain benefits. Similarly, a national insurance number is not sufficient to demonstrate an entitlement to work.

Palace of Westminster: Rodents

Lord Elton: To ask the Chairman of Committees whether consideration will be given to acquiring a number of respectable cats to reduce the rodent population of the Palace of Westminster.

Lord Brabazon of Tara: The possible use of cats, respectable or otherwise, to control the rodent population in the Palace of Westminster has been considered and rejected on a number of practical grounds. For example, the cats would ingest mouse poison when eating poisoned mice; there would be nothing to keep them in the areas where they are most needed, or to stop them walking on desks in offices and on tables in restaurants and bars; they can carry fleas and other parasites; and many people are allergic to cat hair. However, the Administration is taking a wide range of other control measures such as significantly increasing the number of bait boxes and traps, sealing mouse access points and intensifying the cleaning regime to minimise the presence of crumbs in the bars and food outlets. The age, construction and location of the Palace of Westminster are such that it will never be possible to eradicate mice entirely, but all appropriate measures are being taken to minimise the numbers.

Pharmacy Order 2010

Lord Rosser: To ask Her Majesty's Government under what circumstances inspectors appointed under article 8 of the Pharmacy Order 2010 may enter and search any premises, including any dwelling house, without first obtaining the consent of the occupier of the premises or obtaining from a judge or magistrate a warrant authorising the entry and search.
	To ask Her Majesty's Government whether it is an offence intentionally to obstruct an inspector exercising functions under articles 10 or 11 of the Pharmacy Order 2010 when that inspector has not obtained from a judge or magistrate a warrant authorising entry and search of the premises.

Baroness Thornton: Article 10(1) of the Pharmacy Order 2010 (the Order) permits an inspector to enter any registered pharmacy or other premises at any reasonable hour without notice or a warrant. This right of entry is restricted and inspectors may enter premises only in order to:
	enforce the standards required to be met by pharmacy owners and superintendent pharmacists in connection with carrying on a retail pharmacy business at a registered pharmacy;assist the council in its investigation of matter relating to fitness to practise of registrants; enforce provisions within the order with respect to offences relating to the Register; and enforce any other provisions of the order and of rules made under the order.
	Article 10(2) of the order provides that an inspector should give 24 hours' notice of the intended entry into premises that are, or form part of, a private dwelling house. This is not intended to give an inspector a power to enter such premises without consent or by force.
	Article 10(3) of the order covers the position when entry has been refused, in which case an inspector must apply for a warrant. The possibility of refusal of entry without a warrant is specifically catered for in Article 10 of the order, which provides alternative measures that the inspector will be required to employ in order to exercise their functions. This involves obtaining a warrant.
	It is not the intention that the obstruction offences in Article 12 of the order should apply where entry with 24 hours' notice has been refused. The possibility of a refusal is specifically catered for in Article 10 of the order, which provides alternative measures that the inspectors will be required to employ in order to exercise their functions. This involves obtaining a warrant. Once an inspector has obtained a warrant, they should not be obstructed from exercising their functions.
	Article 12 of the Order is therefore intended to apply where, for example, an individual obstructs an inspector in the execution of a warrant or obstructs the inspector in the course of exercising the inspector's functions once entry has been gained to the premises with or without a warrant.

Planning

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: To ask Her Majesty's Government following their strategy Food 2030, how they intend to value "best and most versatile land" in deciding whether non-food-producing development should be allowed in such areas.

Lord Davies of Oldham: Current policy in relation to best and most versatile land is set out in Planning Policy Statement 7 (Sustainable Development in Rural Areas). As stated in the soil strategy Safeguarding our Soils, published on 24 September 2009, Defra and CLG are reviewing the effectiveness of existing planning policy to protect important soils and whether there is a need to update it.

Police: Northern Ireland

Lord Maginnis of Drumglass: To ask Her Majesty's Government why, in relation to section 2.5 of the Agreement at Hillsborough Castle of 5 February, the Chief Constable's status has changed from being operationally "independent" to being operationally "responsible" for directing and controlling the police; and what assessment they have made of whether that change will affect public confidence in the Police Service of Northern Ireland.

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: The fundamental principle that the police are impartial and free from political control is enshrined in legislation and was underlined in the 1998 Good Friday agreement and reinforced by the 1999 Report of the Independent Commission on Policing in Northern Ireland (the Patten Report). The concept of the operational responsibility of the Chief Constable was highlighted in the Patten Report and in Northern Ireland is effected through the role of the Policing Board; it is entirely consistent with his operational independence. The agreement at Hillsborough Castle does not, therefore, change the status of the Chief Constable.
	Policing arrangements in Northern Ireland have worked well and continue to work well; the high level of public confidence in policing is evidence of this. The latest figures show confidence standing at 79.6 per cent.

Prisons: Gypsies and Travellers

Baroness Whitaker: To ask Her Majesty's Government how many of the 46,000 complaints of racism in prisons since 2006 relate to Gypsies and Travellers.

Lord Bach: The ethnicity of parties involved in a reported incident is not collected centrally. This information will not often be collected locally with reports submitted not always identifying parties involved in an alleged incident.
	While ethnicity data is not always collected, information that is reported will be regularly scrutinised locally. This would include any issues regarding the victimisation of a particular group such as Gypsy, Traveller and Roma prisoners. We don't request that this information is reported centrally and to collate these data would require examination of every individual report submitted.

Rural Development Programme

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Dan Norris, on 9 November 2009 (HC Deb, col 200W), why the average grant under the Rural Development Programme for England fell from around £2,800 in 2007-08 to around £1,500 in 2008-09.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The previous answer given on 9 November 2009 at column 2W of the House of Commons Official Report reported the amount spent under Rural Development Programme for England (RDPE) business support projects (as defined under Solutions for Business) and the number of beneficiaries in the years 2007-08 and 2008-09. It is not possible to derive the average grant to individual beneficiaries from these figures because multiple businesses can benefit from a single project supported through the RDPE. For example, a training provider, as the recipient of a grant award from the Programme, can provide assistance to a large number of businesses.
	The grants awarded in 2007-08 related to payments to legacy projects approved under the England Rural Development Programme (ERDP), the predecessor to the current RDPE. Grants awarded in 2008-09 related to payments made to a combination of legacy ERDP projects and the first projects to be supported through the RDPE, which commenced only in January 2008.
	Largely because of the late start to the programme, the total amount of grant awarded in 2008-09 was lower than in 2007-08. Nevertheless, the number of businesses that benefited from the programme increased.

Rural Development Programme

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Dan Norris, on 9 November 2009 (HC Deb, col 200W), what is the normal interval between an application being made to the Rural Development Programme and a grant being awarded.

Lord Davies of Oldham: Regional Development Agencies (RDAs) are the delivery bodies responsible for delivering the socio-economic measures of the Rural Development Programme for England. All project applications are subject to rigorous appraisal processes based on guidance from the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and approved by the Office of Project and Programme Advice and Training.
	The time taken to appraise projects reflects the size and complexity of the project proposal. The normal interval between an application being made to the RDAs and a grant being awarded varies between regions, and often depends on the amount of grant being sought by the applicant. The interval between application and any grant award is normally four weeks to three months, but can take longer in exceptional circumstances.

South Caucasus

Lord Hylton: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they have worked with British non-governmental organisations in conflict resolution in the south Caucasus; and what lessons they have learnt from that work.

Lord Brett: The Government have worked with a number of British non-governmental organisations on conflict prevention and resolution in the South Caucasus in recent years, including International Alert, Conciliation Resources and the Institute for War and Peace Reporting. Lessons specific to the South Caucasus conflict environment have included:
	domestic civil society in the South Caucasus remains weak in some areas. There is a need to work with project partners to try to build up the strength and role of civil society; a coalition of non-governmental organizations (NGOs), including where international organisations partner local ones, can often be more powerful than NGOs working in isolation, as shown by the work of the Consortium Initiative on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict;monitoring and evaluation of projects is important not just for accountability and to gauge progress against objectives, but to maintain flexibility in the South Caucasus region in response to changes in the conflict environment;the importance of achieving government and elite buy-in; and of leveraging the support of other major donors. Georgia in particular saw huge international aid flows in the aftermath of the Georgia-Russia war and donor coordination remains important to avoid duplication and gaps;economic incentives can transcend administrative and political boundaries, as evidenced by International Alert's project, Economy and Conflict. This project builds consensus by identifying constituencies of people who have a stake in the peace process;working through British NGOs can be valuable. The Government benefit significantly from the established long-term links and trust that these organisations build up with local actors across conflict divides, and consequently are able to achieve more in a shorter timeframe than would otherwise be possible. It is important, however, to ensure that objectives are regularly reviewed and projects remain relevant to the Government's priorities and the needs of the local environment; andsupport to the South Caucasus media infrastructure can help to challenge entrenched stereotypes of "the enemy" and tackle the information isolation problem inherent in many communities in the region. It has also been valuable to fund work that fosters grassroots research and debate, building capacity among local think-tank organisations.

Turkey

Lord Hylton: To ask Her Majesty's Government what is the status of the recommendations of the 6th European Union-Turkey Civic Commission's International Conference; and who is responsible for implementing them.

Lord Brett: The European Union-Turkey Civic Commission (EUTCC) is a non-official body that monitors the implementation by Turkey of European human rights standards. The EUTCC would expect Turkey to scrutinise its recommendations carefully but, due to the body's un-official status, the Turkish authorities are under no obligation to act upon the recommendations. We continue to encourage Turkey to meet EU standards in the areas of human rights and democracy as part of the EU accession process.

Turkey

Lord Hylton: To ask Her Majesty's Government what representations they have made to the government of Turkey about the charges against Mr Muharrem Erbey, vice-chairman of the Human Rights Association.

Lord Brett: We have not made any direct representations to the Turkish authorities about Mr Erbey. We are following the case closely along with EU partners and are in regular contact with the Human Rights Association.

Turkey

Lord Hylton: To ask Her Majesty's Government what representations they have made or will make to the government of Turkey about the 15-year old Kurdish girl, Berivan, who was arrested in October 2009 at Batman, and imprisoned for alleged terrorist offences; whether they have raised her alleged maltreatment in custody; and whether they have discussed why 2,622 minors are being held in Turkish prisons.

Lord Brett: The UK Government are aware that a number of minors are being held in adult jails in Turkey. While we have not made specific representations about Berivan's case, we have made representations to the Turkish authorities about protecting children's rights, most recently in September 2009. We also supported the European Commission's Annual Progress Report on Turkey, published in October 2009, which raised serious concerns about the juvenile justice system. The Turkish authorities have undertaken to improve the pre-trial condition of minors and to make more extensive use of the probation system.

Veterinary Medicine Regulations 2009

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether paragraph 11 of Schedule 1 to the Veterinary Medicine Regulations 2009 (SI 2009/2297) means that a product will not receive marketing authorisation for 10 years after the initial authorisation (in the case of products for bees or fish, 13 years), regardless of its benefits compared to its pharmacologically equivalent product.

Lord Davies of Oldham: If an application is made using the procedure for a pharmacologically equivalent medicinal product, then the time limits referred to in paragraph 11-and, if appropriate, paragraph 12-of Schedule 1 to the Veterinary Medicine Regulations 2009 (SI 2009/2297) will apply.
	These time limits are set in Article 13 of European Directive 2001/82/EC (as amended).
	If products are pharmacologically equivalent then this means that their safety and efficacy in the target species should in effect be the same and therefore the pharmacologically equivalent product should not have any clinical benefits over the existing product.
	If a company generates the complete quality, safety and efficacy data for a veterinary medicine, they may apply at any time for a marketing authorisation under paragraph 2 of Schedule 1.

Veterinary Medicine Regulations 2009

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether paragraph 11 of Schedule 1 to the Veterinary Medicine Regulations 2009 (SI 2009/2297) covers reference products made and authorised in the United Kingdom, reference products made in the European Union that do not have marketing authorisation in the United Kingdom, reference products made anywhere in the world that have marketing authorisation in the United Kingdom, and reference products made anywhere in the world that have a marketing authorisation recognised by the Government.

Lord Davies of Oldham: Paragraph 11 is applicable for any reference product that is cited as the basis of the pharmacologically equivalent application. All products that have a marketing authorisation within the European Union which complies with European Directive 2001/82/EC (as amended) are potentially eligible to be cited as the reference medicinal product as part of an application for a pharmacologically equivalent product.
	The controls on the manufacturing of authorised veterinary medicinal products mean that they can be made anywhere in the world. The reference product is not required to be authorised in the UK but it does need to be authorised somewhere in the EU.

Veterinary Medicines Regulations 2009

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the fees laid down in Schedule 7 to the Veterinary Medicines Regulations 2009 (SI 2009/2297) are subject to scrutiny; if so, by whom; and how often.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The fees in Schedule 7 to the Veterinary Medicines Regulations are reviewed annually and any proposed changes are subject to a full 12-week stakeholder consultation. The consultation documents include an impact assessment explaining why changes are proposed and the estimated impact that this will have on the business sectors paying the fees. Consultees are invited to comment specifically on the financial impact of the proposed changes.
	The fees are required to enable the Veterinary Medicines Directorate to meet its cost-recovery target and the VMD's accounts are audited annually by the NAO.
	The Veterinary Medicines Regulations are revoked and remade annually and, as a negative resolution SI, are subject to Parliamentary scrutiny before coming into force.

Visas

Lord Laird: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Lord West of Spithead on 12 January (WA 148), why the enumeration of visas granted to overseas students at individual colleges is commercially sensitive; and how providing such numbers would breach the Data Protection Act 1998.

Lord West of Spithead: I refer the noble Lord to my letter to him of 19 February 2010, a copy of which has been placed in the Library. Information on the number of students granted visas and their country of origin is not recorded centrally, and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.